What do you think?
Rate this book
Default: The Landmark Court Battle Over Argentina's $100 Billion Debt Restructuring
The dramatic inside story of the most important case in the history of sovereign debt law
Unlike individuals or corporations that become insolvent, nations do not have access to bankruptcy protection from their creditors. When a country defaults on its debt, the international financial system is ill equipped to manage the crisis. Decisions by key individuals ― from national leaders to those at the International Monetary Fund, from holdout creditors to judges ― determine the fate of an entire national economy. A prime example is Argentina's 2001 default on $100 billion in bonds, which stands out for its messy outcomes and outsized impact on sovereign debt markets, sovereign debt law, and IMF policy.
Default is the riveting story of Argentina's sovereign debt drama, which reveals the obscure inner workings of sovereign debt restructuring. This detailed case study describes the intense fight over the role of the IMF in Argentina's 2005 debt restructuring and the ensuing bitter decade of litigation with holdout creditors, demonstrating that outcomes for sovereign debt are determined by a complex interplay between financial markets, governments, the IMF, the press, and the courts.
This cautionary tale lays bare the institutional, political, and legal pressures that come into play when a country cannot repay its debts. It offers a deeper understanding of how global financial capitalism functions for those who work in or study debt markets, international finance, international relations, and international law.
Unlike individuals or corporations that become insolvent, nations do not have access to bankruptcy protection from their creditors. When a country defaults on its debt, the international financial system is ill equipped to manage the crisis. Decisions by key individuals ― from national leaders to those at the International Monetary Fund, from holdout creditors to judges ― determine the fate of an entire national economy. A prime example is Argentina's 2001 default on $100 billion in bonds, which stands out for its messy outcomes and outsized impact on sovereign debt markets, sovereign debt law, and IMF policy.
Default is the riveting story of Argentina's sovereign debt drama, which reveals the obscure inner workings of sovereign debt restructuring. This detailed case study describes the intense fight over the role of the IMF in Argentina's 2005 debt restructuring and the ensuing bitter decade of litigation with holdout creditors, demonstrating that outcomes for sovereign debt are determined by a complex interplay between financial markets, governments, the IMF, the press, and the courts.
This cautionary tale lays bare the institutional, political, and legal pressures that come into play when a country cannot repay its debts. It offers a deeper understanding of how global financial capitalism functions for those who work in or study debt markets, international finance, international relations, and international law.
424 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 2024
72 people are currently reading
911 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
February 14, 2024
Really good at breaking down what seems like a mishmash of financial engineering going on in Argentina. Simplifies the intricacies of what was probably one of the most complicated court cases in sovereign debt restructuring history.
April 22, 2025
A little dry and narrative difficult but wow in depth - I love law
August 2, 2024
Great insights into recent economic history, nerd stuff, loved it!
November 18, 2024
After visiting the country and learning firsthand more about the trails and tribulations on money and survival, Argentines deal with daily, I can attest that the realities brought by the events laid out in this history amount to a full-blown country-wide humanitarian crisis. Reaching every sector, every person, especially the poor and minority populations, who are struggling already, but also the middle class and the upper middle classes-they were all brought down a peg and are feeling new levels of suffering, post-defaults and in this time of 300% + inflation…
It’s about the many technical defaults that occurred, the court drama between international creditors, countries that lended, the financial org called the IMF, and many Argentine presidents and how they reacted to the situation, in particular both of the Kirchner duo, and then when finally beat cristina out of power.
The saga continues. Read this book for a deeper intellectual understanding of this country’s trauma, past and current, as we head into what is the middle of the second decade since the first decided 2001 default by the IMF.
Sovereign debt didn’t have a meaning to me before reading this. Now, I hope that the entire financial community, learns from what happened in these decades, and that the long-winded fight between creditors v. Argentina is the last horrific disaster of its kind. Learn from history politicians and lenders, don’t make the same mistakes that happened here. Don’t be callous, don’t make ultimatums, don’t push sovereigns to make decisions, because, when backed against a wall, they will always fight the challenge to their identity and sovereignty that the very one-sided proposal inevitably suggests. Don’t be blind to precedent, as we are always creating new situations, which deserve reevaluations upon the merits of each sovereignty case.
Argentina will rise. Their spirit is already high. Nationalism is not the issue. Partners in government…maybe.
Sometimes, quick to make enemies over internationally what is considered minor disputes, can the nation recover its support and raise international morale in their country again?
It’s about the many technical defaults that occurred, the court drama between international creditors, countries that lended, the financial org called the IMF, and many Argentine presidents and how they reacted to the situation, in particular both of the Kirchner duo, and then when finally beat cristina out of power.
The saga continues. Read this book for a deeper intellectual understanding of this country’s trauma, past and current, as we head into what is the middle of the second decade since the first decided 2001 default by the IMF.
Sovereign debt didn’t have a meaning to me before reading this. Now, I hope that the entire financial community, learns from what happened in these decades, and that the long-winded fight between creditors v. Argentina is the last horrific disaster of its kind. Learn from history politicians and lenders, don’t make the same mistakes that happened here. Don’t be callous, don’t make ultimatums, don’t push sovereigns to make decisions, because, when backed against a wall, they will always fight the challenge to their identity and sovereignty that the very one-sided proposal inevitably suggests. Don’t be blind to precedent, as we are always creating new situations, which deserve reevaluations upon the merits of each sovereignty case.
Argentina will rise. Their spirit is already high. Nationalism is not the issue. Partners in government…maybe.
Sometimes, quick to make enemies over internationally what is considered minor disputes, can the nation recover its support and raise international morale in their country again?
December 22, 2025
Default is ultimately about power, incentives, and contracts. Strip away the flags and rhetoric and governments behave a lot like individuals or corporations. They borrow when they can, overextend when markets let them, rationalize bad decisions, and then look for ways to shift pain onto others when the bill comes due. Sovereign debt is not a special moral category. It is finance with politics layered on top.
Argentina’s crisis shows how value often hides in plain sight. For years, investors accepted that sovereign bonds were essentially unenforceable promises once a country defaulted, governed more by norms than law. Paul Singer and Elliott Associates rejected that premise. They treated sovereign debt the way it was written, not the way everyone assumed it worked. The insight was simple but powerful. Contracts mean what they say, even when the borrower is a country.
Elliott’s breakthrough came from repeating a proven playbook first tested in Peru. Using the pari passu clause, they argued not for equal ranking in theory, but equal payment in practice. If Argentina paid restructured bondholders, it had to pay holdouts at the same time. That interpretation rewired the power balance. Courts agreed. What had been treated as boilerplate language suddenly became a weapon. Reality, not reputation, mattered.
Global macro made everything worse. Argentina’s bonds were US dollar denominated, so when the peso collapsed the debt burden effectively doubled. After 9/11, capital fled risk, the dollar strengthened, and Argentina’s economy deteriorated further. At the same time, the US government’s attention shifted inward and toward the Middle East, reducing its willingness to expend political capital on managing foreign sovereign crises. The combination of currency mismatch, external shock, and declining geopolitical support pushed Argentina into a corner with fewer exits.
Argentina underestimated how exposed it was. It believed size, politics, and time were on its side. Instead, it ran into a legal system that, while slow and imperfect, ultimately enforced the letter of the contract. The irony is that the system worked just well enough to be disruptive but poorly enough to be exhausting. A single New York judge effectively presided over thousands of claims across more than a decade. The burden placed on the courts was enormous, highlighting how fragile and overstretched the legal infrastructure becomes when finance, sovereignty, and scale collide.
The outcome reshaped the sovereign debt market. Argentina’s experience accelerated the adoption of aggregated collective action clauses. These CACs allow a supermajority of bondholders across multiple issues to bind everyone, preventing small holdout groups from extracting disproportionate value. In effect, the system evolved to close the loophole Elliott had exploited. The market learned, but only after billions were transferred and years were lost.
There is no villain in the traditional sense. Elliott played the game as written. Argentina borrowed aggressively and resisted reality for too long. Courts enforced contracts but struggled under the scale and duration of the conflict. The deeper lesson is that systems rarely change proactively. They change only after stress exposes their weaknesses.
At its core, Default is a reminder to look past narratives. Governments are not sacred. Markets are not always efficient. Contracts matter more than consensus. And enormous value often sits right in front of everyone, ignored, until someone is willing to take the text seriously.
⸻
Key Lessons
1. Governments behave like leveraged entities, not moral abstractions.
2. Sovereign debt is finance first, politics second.
3. Global macro shocks can turn bad balance sheets into existential crises.
4. Value often hides in plain sight when assumptions go unchallenged.
5. Contracts matter, especially the parts everyone treats as boilerplate or “market standard.”
6. Elliott’s edge came from enforcing an ambiguous reality, not inventing complexity.
7. Legal systems can function and still be deeply broken at scale.
8. Market rules evolve only after someone exploits their flaws.
9. Risk is often underestimated not because it is hidden, but because it is inconvenient.
Argentina’s crisis shows how value often hides in plain sight. For years, investors accepted that sovereign bonds were essentially unenforceable promises once a country defaulted, governed more by norms than law. Paul Singer and Elliott Associates rejected that premise. They treated sovereign debt the way it was written, not the way everyone assumed it worked. The insight was simple but powerful. Contracts mean what they say, even when the borrower is a country.
Elliott’s breakthrough came from repeating a proven playbook first tested in Peru. Using the pari passu clause, they argued not for equal ranking in theory, but equal payment in practice. If Argentina paid restructured bondholders, it had to pay holdouts at the same time. That interpretation rewired the power balance. Courts agreed. What had been treated as boilerplate language suddenly became a weapon. Reality, not reputation, mattered.
Global macro made everything worse. Argentina’s bonds were US dollar denominated, so when the peso collapsed the debt burden effectively doubled. After 9/11, capital fled risk, the dollar strengthened, and Argentina’s economy deteriorated further. At the same time, the US government’s attention shifted inward and toward the Middle East, reducing its willingness to expend political capital on managing foreign sovereign crises. The combination of currency mismatch, external shock, and declining geopolitical support pushed Argentina into a corner with fewer exits.
Argentina underestimated how exposed it was. It believed size, politics, and time were on its side. Instead, it ran into a legal system that, while slow and imperfect, ultimately enforced the letter of the contract. The irony is that the system worked just well enough to be disruptive but poorly enough to be exhausting. A single New York judge effectively presided over thousands of claims across more than a decade. The burden placed on the courts was enormous, highlighting how fragile and overstretched the legal infrastructure becomes when finance, sovereignty, and scale collide.
The outcome reshaped the sovereign debt market. Argentina’s experience accelerated the adoption of aggregated collective action clauses. These CACs allow a supermajority of bondholders across multiple issues to bind everyone, preventing small holdout groups from extracting disproportionate value. In effect, the system evolved to close the loophole Elliott had exploited. The market learned, but only after billions were transferred and years were lost.
There is no villain in the traditional sense. Elliott played the game as written. Argentina borrowed aggressively and resisted reality for too long. Courts enforced contracts but struggled under the scale and duration of the conflict. The deeper lesson is that systems rarely change proactively. They change only after stress exposes their weaknesses.
At its core, Default is a reminder to look past narratives. Governments are not sacred. Markets are not always efficient. Contracts matter more than consensus. And enormous value often sits right in front of everyone, ignored, until someone is willing to take the text seriously.
⸻
Key Lessons
1. Governments behave like leveraged entities, not moral abstractions.
2. Sovereign debt is finance first, politics second.
3. Global macro shocks can turn bad balance sheets into existential crises.
4. Value often hides in plain sight when assumptions go unchallenged.
5. Contracts matter, especially the parts everyone treats as boilerplate or “market standard.”
6. Elliott’s edge came from enforcing an ambiguous reality, not inventing complexity.
7. Legal systems can function and still be deeply broken at scale.
8. Market rules evolve only after someone exploits their flaws.
9. Risk is often underestimated not because it is hidden, but because it is inconvenient.
Read
October 15, 2024I'm glad I read this book about a topic I didn't know much about! (thanks Colton)
I took a class on Latin American politics at Georgetown but the curriculum ended at the beginning of the 2000s, so I actually didn't know much about Argentina's sovereign debt crisis. This book dove into all the details and its narrative form made it easier to comprehend--albeit I had to read it slowly and take notes in order to truly understand all the characters, their motivations, and legal intricacies. So, while the events themselves were fascinating, I have to thank Makoff's storytelling to make it accessible.
I took a class on Latin American politics at Georgetown but the curriculum ended at the beginning of the 2000s, so I actually didn't know much about Argentina's sovereign debt crisis. This book dove into all the details and its narrative form made it easier to comprehend--albeit I had to read it slowly and take notes in order to truly understand all the characters, their motivations, and legal intricacies. So, while the events themselves were fascinating, I have to thank Makoff's storytelling to make it accessible.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 5, 2025
The main accomplishment of Default by Gregory Makoff is its ability to reconstruct Argentina’s infamous restructuring saga both as an enjoyable read and as the rigorous analysis the topic deserves. Maintaining such a level of detail in a text which remains surprisingly captivating to a broader audience than a narrow group of sovereign debt aficionados is no minor feat.
The scene is familiar to anyone who has followed the gradual descent of Argentina and its creditors into legal purgatory: the 2001 default, at the time the largest in history; the piecemeal restructurings; and the drawn-out legal showdown in the Southern District of New York under the weary eye of Judge T. Griesa. It would have been easy for such a well-researched book to loose itself in a dry recollection of events, court hearings and legal opinions. Makoff masterfully avoids such snares by giving voice to the main characters of what rapidly devolves into an intricate decades-long play.
His reconstruction is not only accurate but also engaging and lively. One cannot but sympathize for Judge Griesa and his exhaustion with the never-ending case, his exasperation at that "uniquely recalcitrant debtor" and the flocks of angry creditors descending on his courthouse as a result of Argentina's intransigence. And yet at the same it is hard not to respect the Republic's obstinate resistance to the holdout creditors, especially when the fiercest opponents are sophisticated hedge funds whose stake in Argentine debt was purchased for pennies on the dollar. It is not necessary to endorse the populist rhetoric on “vulture funds" to prove a slight flicker of satisfaction each time Elliot Associates saw its daring legal escamotages matched by equally astute Argentine countermeasures.
Downstream from the headline-grabbing disputes, common citizens are also part of the story, be them tens of thousands of European pensioners whose investments suddenly vanished into legal limbo or, even more tragic, millions of Argentine citizens who bore the brunt of economic instability. Unfortunately, herein also lies the book's dispiriting conclusion that while Argentina's restructuring forever changed the world of sovereign debt and default, it did not change the country's economic fortunes. Despite Makoff's great storytelling, not even he can avoid the painful realization: Argentina in 2001 was a distressed economy which had just defaulted on its debt and sought to regain its footing via IMF assistance and the promise of bold reforms; Argentina in 2024 is a distressed economy that has just defaulted on its debt and seeks to regain its footing via IMF assistance and the promise of bold reforms...With each new wave of economic sperimentation followed inevitably by relapse into insolvency, it remains to be seen whether the forceful reforms introduced by Javier Milei will manage to break through the crisis cycle. In the meantime, to quote one of Milei's predecessors, former President Néstor Kirchner, the legacy of Argentina's troubled restructuring should be regarded "withouth rancor, but with memory".
The scene is familiar to anyone who has followed the gradual descent of Argentina and its creditors into legal purgatory: the 2001 default, at the time the largest in history; the piecemeal restructurings; and the drawn-out legal showdown in the Southern District of New York under the weary eye of Judge T. Griesa. It would have been easy for such a well-researched book to loose itself in a dry recollection of events, court hearings and legal opinions. Makoff masterfully avoids such snares by giving voice to the main characters of what rapidly devolves into an intricate decades-long play.
His reconstruction is not only accurate but also engaging and lively. One cannot but sympathize for Judge Griesa and his exhaustion with the never-ending case, his exasperation at that "uniquely recalcitrant debtor" and the flocks of angry creditors descending on his courthouse as a result of Argentina's intransigence. And yet at the same it is hard not to respect the Republic's obstinate resistance to the holdout creditors, especially when the fiercest opponents are sophisticated hedge funds whose stake in Argentine debt was purchased for pennies on the dollar. It is not necessary to endorse the populist rhetoric on “vulture funds" to prove a slight flicker of satisfaction each time Elliot Associates saw its daring legal escamotages matched by equally astute Argentine countermeasures.
Downstream from the headline-grabbing disputes, common citizens are also part of the story, be them tens of thousands of European pensioners whose investments suddenly vanished into legal limbo or, even more tragic, millions of Argentine citizens who bore the brunt of economic instability. Unfortunately, herein also lies the book's dispiriting conclusion that while Argentina's restructuring forever changed the world of sovereign debt and default, it did not change the country's economic fortunes. Despite Makoff's great storytelling, not even he can avoid the painful realization: Argentina in 2001 was a distressed economy which had just defaulted on its debt and sought to regain its footing via IMF assistance and the promise of bold reforms; Argentina in 2024 is a distressed economy that has just defaulted on its debt and seeks to regain its footing via IMF assistance and the promise of bold reforms...With each new wave of economic sperimentation followed inevitably by relapse into insolvency, it remains to be seen whether the forceful reforms introduced by Javier Milei will manage to break through the crisis cycle. In the meantime, to quote one of Milei's predecessors, former President Néstor Kirchner, the legacy of Argentina's troubled restructuring should be regarded "withouth rancor, but with memory".
January 1, 2025
Imagine if all countries were obliged to repay their debts fully, with interest. In such a world, a government bond from any country would be as predictable and uniform in value as gold bullion, regardless of the issuing nation. Contrastingly, if countries could default on debts without severe repercussions, lenders would limit extending credit only to nations with unblemished repayment histories.
However, in the real world, sovereign debt is far from this straightforward. Most countries, at some point, have defaulted on their international loans, leading to intricate negotiations and partial repayments. In the last five decades there has been close to 200 debt restructurings, which were settled by governments paying back 75% of what they owed on average. Argentina's debt restructuring stands out not only for its size and complexity, but also because it put on collision course a government determined not to pay back more than 30% with a group of creditor with no intention to settle unless paid in full.
Greg Makoff's skillfully crafted book provides an in-depth exploration of the intense legal battle that unfolded. The narrative, primarily chronological, adeptly navigates through courtroom dramas and negotiation scenes. Makoff enriches the story with comprehensive background on the pivotal figures and events that influenced the final outcome.
A significant insight from this book is the unpredictability of the creditor-debtor conflict's resolution, highlighting that nothing was set in stone. Argentina's premiers and Ministers of Finance, the various creditors, judge Griesa and other judges overseeing similar cases and those on appeal courts, IMF’s leadership and board all came with different dispositions and greatly shaped subsequent events. I noted a number of key factors that determined the outcome in Argentina, but also at play elsewhere in all restructurings.
- Holdout creditors - Large banks, which dominated private lending to developing countries for decades, prefer a quick settlement rather than prolonged legal battles. But Argentina’s bonds also attracted some small investors and sophisticated hedge funds who weren’t interested in a quick settlement. Some funds, often labelled 'vulture funds,' bought defaulted bonds at steep discounts geared up for a prolonged fight. Such behavior took everyone by surprise.
- The contract text - People who buy and sell government debt don’t seem to read or care about the underlying contract. Argentina’s contracts had some blatant shortcomings, which no one seemed to mind for years. To Argentina’s bad luck, Elliott Management, the most notorious holdout creditor, was quite novel in its approach in looking for contractual weaknesses in deciding where to buy up distressed debt. Argentina’s main problem were the contractual weaknesses in combating holdout behavior, but the problems often go far beyond such provisions. A subset of the debt was in the form of Floating Rate Accrual Note (FRANs), which savvy creditors quickly realized may be owed especially high interest rates in default scenarios.
- The legal strategy pursued - Argentina's legal strategy, involving the Lock Law and the RUFO clause, was a high-stakes gamble, aiming to make repayment to these 'vulture funds' both financially burdensome and politically unpalatable. The government’s strategy of tying their own hands may have worked initially in pushing many holdouts into capitulating and accepting the government’s (25%) offer, but ultimately cost them dearly as the legality of these clauses played out in the court.
- The judge - As the book recounts, Judge Griesa initially leaned towards Argentina's predicament, but as the case progressed, he increasingly perceived the Argentine government as the more obstinate party. His evolving emotions leading up to the consequential rulings, underscores how a single judge can critically impact a nation's economic destiny.
- The jurisdiction - The legal battle, primarily in Manhattan's Federal District Court under New York law, highlighted the strategic importance of jurisdiction. The court's ability to leverage U.S. financial influence in seizing assets or blocking payments underscored the complex interplay between legal authority and economic power. It also begs the question if New York’s primacy may ever be challenged if battles are found to be drawn out and unpredictable.
- The IMF staff assessment - The IMF's role in sovereign debt crises typically involves assessing a borrower's capacity for repayment. In Argentina's case, however, the IMF took a backseat. This helped the government put forward demands for more lenient terms, but these were viewed more skeptically. This situation underscores the importance, yet complexity, of third-party assessments in debt negotiations.
- The debtor’s politics - Never has a modern debt restructuring been dragged out for so long. The contrasting approaches of Argentina's administrations, from the Peronist government's combative stance to the succeeding right-wing government's expedient settlement, demonstrate the profound impact of political shifts on international debt negotiations.
- International politics - The involvement of various countries in a dispute of such magnitude is expected. Notably, the advocacy of IMF's Executive Directors from Italy and Japan, ostensibly supporting more austerity for Argentina, seemingly reflected the interests of small creditors in their home countries. This highlights how debtor nations need to be aware of the global distribution of their creditors, as international politics can play a significant role in debt resolutions.
- Only time will tell (aka state-contingent debt instruments) –The borrowers who accepted Argentina’s initial payout of 25 cents on the dollar were also provided with GDP warrants. These unusual instruments were deemed valueless initially. But they offered creditors the prospect of additional compensation should Argentina's economy experience robust growth. Surprisingly, Argentina's economy did recover more swiftly than anticipated, and has paid out another 18 cents on the dollar over time. With ten more years until the warrants mature and a court battle ongoing on contested GDP growth calculations, there may be even more payment down the line. What initially appeared as a big loss (haircut) to creditors turned out to be a lot more modest for those who waited it out.
Today numerous nations, especially in Africa, struggle with external debt repayment again exacerbated by recent shocks and vast sums needed to combat climate change. While some issues, like dealing with holdout bondholders, have become more manageable, new challenges have arisen, notably increased tensions between creditor governments. This begs the question: can debtor nations hope debt renegotiations will resolve their financial difficulties? The uncertain path highlights the importance of learning from past mistakes.
However, in the real world, sovereign debt is far from this straightforward. Most countries, at some point, have defaulted on their international loans, leading to intricate negotiations and partial repayments. In the last five decades there has been close to 200 debt restructurings, which were settled by governments paying back 75% of what they owed on average. Argentina's debt restructuring stands out not only for its size and complexity, but also because it put on collision course a government determined not to pay back more than 30% with a group of creditor with no intention to settle unless paid in full.
Greg Makoff's skillfully crafted book provides an in-depth exploration of the intense legal battle that unfolded. The narrative, primarily chronological, adeptly navigates through courtroom dramas and negotiation scenes. Makoff enriches the story with comprehensive background on the pivotal figures and events that influenced the final outcome.
A significant insight from this book is the unpredictability of the creditor-debtor conflict's resolution, highlighting that nothing was set in stone. Argentina's premiers and Ministers of Finance, the various creditors, judge Griesa and other judges overseeing similar cases and those on appeal courts, IMF’s leadership and board all came with different dispositions and greatly shaped subsequent events. I noted a number of key factors that determined the outcome in Argentina, but also at play elsewhere in all restructurings.
- Holdout creditors - Large banks, which dominated private lending to developing countries for decades, prefer a quick settlement rather than prolonged legal battles. But Argentina’s bonds also attracted some small investors and sophisticated hedge funds who weren’t interested in a quick settlement. Some funds, often labelled 'vulture funds,' bought defaulted bonds at steep discounts geared up for a prolonged fight. Such behavior took everyone by surprise.
- The contract text - People who buy and sell government debt don’t seem to read or care about the underlying contract. Argentina’s contracts had some blatant shortcomings, which no one seemed to mind for years. To Argentina’s bad luck, Elliott Management, the most notorious holdout creditor, was quite novel in its approach in looking for contractual weaknesses in deciding where to buy up distressed debt. Argentina’s main problem were the contractual weaknesses in combating holdout behavior, but the problems often go far beyond such provisions. A subset of the debt was in the form of Floating Rate Accrual Note (FRANs), which savvy creditors quickly realized may be owed especially high interest rates in default scenarios.
- The legal strategy pursued - Argentina's legal strategy, involving the Lock Law and the RUFO clause, was a high-stakes gamble, aiming to make repayment to these 'vulture funds' both financially burdensome and politically unpalatable. The government’s strategy of tying their own hands may have worked initially in pushing many holdouts into capitulating and accepting the government’s (25%) offer, but ultimately cost them dearly as the legality of these clauses played out in the court.
- The judge - As the book recounts, Judge Griesa initially leaned towards Argentina's predicament, but as the case progressed, he increasingly perceived the Argentine government as the more obstinate party. His evolving emotions leading up to the consequential rulings, underscores how a single judge can critically impact a nation's economic destiny.
- The jurisdiction - The legal battle, primarily in Manhattan's Federal District Court under New York law, highlighted the strategic importance of jurisdiction. The court's ability to leverage U.S. financial influence in seizing assets or blocking payments underscored the complex interplay between legal authority and economic power. It also begs the question if New York’s primacy may ever be challenged if battles are found to be drawn out and unpredictable.
- The IMF staff assessment - The IMF's role in sovereign debt crises typically involves assessing a borrower's capacity for repayment. In Argentina's case, however, the IMF took a backseat. This helped the government put forward demands for more lenient terms, but these were viewed more skeptically. This situation underscores the importance, yet complexity, of third-party assessments in debt negotiations.
- The debtor’s politics - Never has a modern debt restructuring been dragged out for so long. The contrasting approaches of Argentina's administrations, from the Peronist government's combative stance to the succeeding right-wing government's expedient settlement, demonstrate the profound impact of political shifts on international debt negotiations.
- International politics - The involvement of various countries in a dispute of such magnitude is expected. Notably, the advocacy of IMF's Executive Directors from Italy and Japan, ostensibly supporting more austerity for Argentina, seemingly reflected the interests of small creditors in their home countries. This highlights how debtor nations need to be aware of the global distribution of their creditors, as international politics can play a significant role in debt resolutions.
- Only time will tell (aka state-contingent debt instruments) –The borrowers who accepted Argentina’s initial payout of 25 cents on the dollar were also provided with GDP warrants. These unusual instruments were deemed valueless initially. But they offered creditors the prospect of additional compensation should Argentina's economy experience robust growth. Surprisingly, Argentina's economy did recover more swiftly than anticipated, and has paid out another 18 cents on the dollar over time. With ten more years until the warrants mature and a court battle ongoing on contested GDP growth calculations, there may be even more payment down the line. What initially appeared as a big loss (haircut) to creditors turned out to be a lot more modest for those who waited it out.
Today numerous nations, especially in Africa, struggle with external debt repayment again exacerbated by recent shocks and vast sums needed to combat climate change. While some issues, like dealing with holdout bondholders, have become more manageable, new challenges have arisen, notably increased tensions between creditor governments. This begs the question: can debtor nations hope debt renegotiations will resolve their financial difficulties? The uncertain path highlights the importance of learning from past mistakes.
February 15, 2025
A well-researched, well-written book on how perseverance and determination can bring the financial might of even countries to their knees.
The book goes chronologically from how Argentina's 2001 default on its sovereign debt triggered a decades long war pitting the country against numerous creditors and specialty hedge funds. I particularly liked the attention to detail when explaining Elliot's pari passu interpretation, and how new legal vehicles such as CACs make sure something like this never happens again.
The book is not too technical in finance lingo, and reads smoothly like a history book.
The book goes chronologically from how Argentina's 2001 default on its sovereign debt triggered a decades long war pitting the country against numerous creditors and specialty hedge funds. I particularly liked the attention to detail when explaining Elliot's pari passu interpretation, and how new legal vehicles such as CACs make sure something like this never happens again.
The book is not too technical in finance lingo, and reads smoothly like a history book.
March 11, 2024
How do you bring tell a compelling story in which the backdrop is judge Griesa's court room, the battle is fought with legal opinions and the outcomes involve parri passu, champerty and RUFOs? That is a challenge Gregory Makoff has accepted. Even though he largely succeeds in finding a nice balance between storytelling and legal wonkery, the book isn't for the faint hearted. Nonetheless, it is a riveting and highly informative read.
The book is descriptive and Makoff chooses to limit his own judgements as much as possible. Even though this enhances the objectivity of the book, it sometimes misses the mark by not calling our if something is outrageously out of whack. For example, the fact that European IMF Board Members serviced the wishes of holdout creditors (and thereby impacting the IMFs independence) isn't only
startling, its borderline corrupt. By omitting these judgements, every development in the story is treated equally whilst some events were clearly more odd than others.
Aside from a lack of interpretation, the book mostly hits all the right notes and provides something new, informative and interesting. Oh, and f*ck you Elliot.
The book is descriptive and Makoff chooses to limit his own judgements as much as possible. Even though this enhances the objectivity of the book, it sometimes misses the mark by not calling our if something is outrageously out of whack. For example, the fact that European IMF Board Members serviced the wishes of holdout creditors (and thereby impacting the IMFs independence) isn't only
startling, its borderline corrupt. By omitting these judgements, every development in the story is treated equally whilst some events were clearly more odd than others.
Aside from a lack of interpretation, the book mostly hits all the right notes and provides something new, informative and interesting. Oh, and f*ck you Elliot.
June 2, 2025
Surprisingly brisk read given the subject matter. Reads more like a legal thriller than a dry economic case study.
Argentina, often described in the book as the recalcitrant debtor and not without reason, still comes off as the more sympathetic party when placed against the backdrop of hedge funds exploiting legal loopholes and running a propaganda campaign with the ATFA. The cat-and-mouse maneuvers to force a sovereign nation to pay feel as much about power as they do about principle.
Argentina, often described in the book as the recalcitrant debtor and not without reason, still comes off as the more sympathetic party when placed against the backdrop of hedge funds exploiting legal loopholes and running a propaganda campaign with the ATFA. The cat-and-mouse maneuvers to force a sovereign nation to pay feel as much about power as they do about principle.
April 10, 2024
Riveting! I used to dream of the day a book would satiate my hunger for detail when it comes to Default’s subject matter. Greg Makoff got super close (now I just want to hear what the Cleary lawyers have to say about this entire saga but I may have to wait till their deathbeds for the juice).
May 28, 2024
This was one of the first cases to get me interested in restructuring a few years ago so I was thrilled that a book was finally written about it but it was just so darn dry. Was hoping there would be more behind the scenes on Elliot’s vessel detainment in Ghana and investment process but oh well
August 12, 2025
Not an easy task to explain sovereign debt renegotiations in terms understandable to a non-expert (and maybe sometimes the author does assume a bit too much knowledge about the US legal system from his readers), but generally a very valiant attempt at doing exactly that. Well researched too.
September 5, 2025
Great breakdown in an interesting sovereign restructuring, legal heavy but still quite readable. Although would have preferred more breakdown of Elliot position and returns, understandable omission given they prefer not to comment.
Want to read
March 1, 2024WSJ
March 12, 2024
Great book exceptionally well researched and written.
March 19, 2024
יותר מידי מתמקד בשגה המשפטית והפוליטית, פחות בכלכלית
May 10, 2024
Very well researched in depth very detailed story of the politics and legal fight over defaulted Argentinian debt.
Great story and insight into world finance.
Great story and insight into world finance.
May 17, 2024
Absolutely incredibly reported.
April 18, 2025
Very interesting story. Read it after I visited Argentina. Ended up rooting for Elliot and the creditors which I'm not sure was the author's intention. Great work Gregory.
July 16, 2025
I liked but super technical
November 1, 2025
Solid. A must read for anyone that wants to understand the dumpster fire thats Argentnian economu. And it just scratches the surface
February 2, 2025
This book reads like a thriller, though I’m pretty confident you would need to have a background in banking, finance, international relations, or law to appreciate the legal and financial elements of an extremely complicated and extraordinary sovereign bond restructuring conducted outside the framework of bankruptcy law. Highly recommended!
December 7, 2025
influencing facts on imf: economic ideology (neoliberal); the us focus on moral hazard vs spillover effect; private debtor gcap
hatred towards imf is based on the marxist/left ideology that rich owe it to poor, rich debtors are not supposed to demand too much from the poor, there is this original sin of capitalist countries towards the their formal colonies. pope francis certainly expouge such ideology in his speech regarding debt
who is at fault for the default? spendthrift government or unfair international economic system? should imf be blamed for the suffering from the economic crisis triggered by default, including the humanitarian adversity as claimed by david graeber in his book debt? debt is always a political issue, mr. robot. Elliot's defense against Peruvian attorney's accusation: maintain healthy sovereign debt market also benefit peruvian poors.
legal term: sovereign immunity; central bank immunity; commercial act; equal payment/ranking; champerty; alter ego theory
where the ny court ruling derive ita power ultimately? us dollar financial system to obey the court order and enforce the ruling, including ny fed which hold dollar reserves of foreign banks, dollar clearing and settlement system. Argentina offshore maneuver to doge the court ruling is another testament of the power of dollar system.
judges not only rule on the technicality, but also his own judgement of justice. change of attitude towards equal treatment shows that
hatred towards imf is based on the marxist/left ideology that rich owe it to poor, rich debtors are not supposed to demand too much from the poor, there is this original sin of capitalist countries towards the their formal colonies. pope francis certainly expouge such ideology in his speech regarding debt
who is at fault for the default? spendthrift government or unfair international economic system? should imf be blamed for the suffering from the economic crisis triggered by default, including the humanitarian adversity as claimed by david graeber in his book debt? debt is always a political issue, mr. robot. Elliot's defense against Peruvian attorney's accusation: maintain healthy sovereign debt market also benefit peruvian poors.
legal term: sovereign immunity; central bank immunity; commercial act; equal payment/ranking; champerty; alter ego theory
where the ny court ruling derive ita power ultimately? us dollar financial system to obey the court order and enforce the ruling, including ny fed which hold dollar reserves of foreign banks, dollar clearing and settlement system. Argentina offshore maneuver to doge the court ruling is another testament of the power of dollar system.
judges not only rule on the technicality, but also his own judgement of justice. change of attitude towards equal treatment shows that
August 20, 2025
This is a fascinating book on Argentina’s 2001 default and the resulting bankruptcy-fight with creditors. The book is, at times, pretty legally technical and can be hard to follow if you aren’t reading it straight—there are many things happening at once and a fair amount of legal jargon you need to get accustomed to. This book is quite similar to Caesar’s Palace Coup, but a bit more slow and difficult and a little less interesting (in my opinion).
A few things that I took away from this were:
1. Elliott is incredibly impressive. They fought this legal battle against Argentina for years, have extremely smart lawyers, and they are a fearless opponent in any restructuring negotiation.
2. The importance of the bankruptcy judge in determining the outcome. Makoff makes it appear as if a significant part of the battle was pleasing Judge Griesa. It’s hard to know whether that is more truth or good story-telling, but regardless it is pretty fascinating.
3. The necessity of good laws and regulation against holdout creditors. Elliott was able to extract such high returns because they didn’t agree to settle early. It seems that new laws are impeding holdout creditors in the sovereign credit market, preventing the type of trade Elliott put on.
A few things that I took away from this were:
1. Elliott is incredibly impressive. They fought this legal battle against Argentina for years, have extremely smart lawyers, and they are a fearless opponent in any restructuring negotiation.
2. The importance of the bankruptcy judge in determining the outcome. Makoff makes it appear as if a significant part of the battle was pleasing Judge Griesa. It’s hard to know whether that is more truth or good story-telling, but regardless it is pretty fascinating.
3. The necessity of good laws and regulation against holdout creditors. Elliott was able to extract such high returns because they didn’t agree to settle early. It seems that new laws are impeding holdout creditors in the sovereign credit market, preventing the type of trade Elliott put on.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews